pkwwjd

Locke will see the statue at some point in time and know that Charlie took the heroin. Locke is the only one who knew Charlie's addiction, and knew that there was heroin in the statues. I don't remember if Jack knew it was heroin. I think he just knew that Charlie was going through withdrawal.

watch the first video, he almost wipes out as he rides away from the camera!!

The only problem with the logic -- and hence "the trick" -- is that to remove (A-B) from both sides of the equation, one must divide by 0 which results in an undefined result. Cool trick though

Great to hear it Rubes. I worked with Lumiere Medical Ministries a few years back. They have a clinic (Hopital Lumiere) in Bonn Finn, just north of Les Cayes on the Southern peninsula. Great experience. As far as Haiti & football -- I watched the GB Packers beat Drew Bledsoe & the Patsies in the Super Bowl from the hospital in Bonn Finn. Lots of football fans at that location.

OK, I'll say it ... Yeah, I've heard of him, Git it done, TD.

Spielberg directed the Anakin/Obi Wan & Palpatine/Yoda fights. Unfortunately, they were much too long to leave in their totality. They were ultimately hacked down to size. But they were GREAT fights.

One of the great quotes from the book, that was omitted from the movie was when Commander Cody receives Order 66 on Utapau (just after he gave back Obi Wan's lightsaber) he says something to the effect of "It would have been easier if I hadn't just given him back his lightsaber" I'm not sure exactly how it was written, but you could tell he was frustrated that he had just returned it and that would make it all the more difficult to carry out the order. Also, Obi Wan was a bit tougher to go down in the book, not just a one shot and over deal.

and a Mel Brooks movie isn't hokey? I don't mind people liking SpaceBalls more, but sounds like Mr. Pot & Mr. Kettle to me.

You sure? I recall it said Episode IV as part of its opening scroll ...

I know a man who believes that SpaceBalls as a movie is better written, has a better story, better acting, better everything than SW -- of course, he's never seen a Star Wars movie, but loves Mel Brooks.

Why is the Lord of the Rings Trilogy and Godfather series taken as one movie, but Star Wars not? When a movie is designed to be part of a sequence, it would seem that affects how each individual movie should be viewed. I agree with grouping movies, when they are designed that way. Star Wars' legacy should hinge on the total package, not just Episode IV.

Why does Sidious need to know about Luke & Leia in order to kill Padme in the force? I'm confused by that statement. Maybe if he killed her, he would have known about the births? Is that what you're saying? I think that requires even more conjecture than my statement -- although, they're both opinions and could both be wrong!

Unfortunately in this discussion, Mark Hamill was the only actor that was a main focus in three movies. JarJar was a secondary character in one movie, support in another, and barely there in a third. Jake Lloyd was a major focus in one movie. His quantity of bad-watchable acting more than makes up for a little bit of horrendous acting. But again, SW is not about Oscar winning acting. It's about a story. A modern day legend/myth. A story about rising, falling and redemption.

My opinion is that Sidious killed her in the force and lied to Vader essentially to close the deal and make sure that he was his minion forever. Just as the entire epic of 6 movies was simply the story of Anakin (his rise, fall, and redemption), the prequels are the story of Palpatine as the puppet master. Everything that happened, came about because he had his hands all over it.

Sad, but very true CTM -- speaking about your comment on this thread vs. the news

I've heard most of them before. Darwin Awards are intended to award those who take their genes out of the gene pool by their own stupidity. Thus, the person must either die or be rendered sterile in some way through their stupid behavior. Most of these, are not Darwin Awards. But they are funny.

So, you're saying that the fillibuster is only intended to delay action? Never meant to block? What's the purpose of an action if it only delays the vote? To rally more support for the losing side? I'm not sure I'm grasping the point, sorry.

Sounds like Teddy in the day when the Dems ruled the world. He'd never say that today!

Mark Hamill's performance throughout most of the original trilogy was darn near as bad as JarJar or Jake Lloyd. Sorry, but this whole epic of SW was never based on good acting. It's the story. It's the ground breaking VFX.

Again, I would agree with the Fillibuster as a parliamentarian action intended to give the minority a voice. But I would struggle to find much evidence that it was intended for or used (as often as it has in the last 5 years) for the purpose of denying a hearing before Congress on Presidential court nominees. There are a bunch of moderate Republican Senators that the Dems can utilize to vote down an inappropriate judicial nominee. A 'yes' or 'no' vote on these nominees needs to happen. Use the fillibuster to block only the most ridiculous nominees, not everyone. The Dems might just be shooting themselves in the foot by continuing to overuse the fillibuster.

you made it political so I'll respond ... the Fillibuster was not generally intended or used to keep judicial nominees from reaching the floor of the Senate. That being said, this will not fix any problems either. The problems lie in the fact that the judicial branch of the government now carries out the duties of the legislative branch, by broadening the interpretation of laws and making those interpretations law in and of themselves. It will take long and radical change to have a judiciary that reins in its own control and limits itself to enforcing the laws that Congress passes.

A friend of mine works at Skywalker Ranch and he said that the opening space battle was the most complex piece of special effects ever. Also the largest space battle ever. I think it will take about 12 viewings of the movie to catch everything that happened in it -- even then, maybe a few more times will reveal more ... I saw it on a standard screen and it felt like an IMAX film.

I truly think that it is about Anakin, ultimately. Remember, he was the one who would bring balance to the force & destroy the Sith. He does that in ROTJ

most of the violence is in typical offscreen SW style -- the worst on screen were amputations like Luke in Empire and the final scene with Anakin & Obi Wan that I cannot divulge more about without giving it away. I firmly believe it was PG-13 because of the feeling of intensity from start to finish with few breaks. I will probably take my 8 year old on Saturday and I'm generally very conservative on what he sees.

right, cuz Lucas planned a diatribe against GWB in the 1970s when he orignially conceptualized the story of Palpatine taking over the universe ... OK, sarcasm is now off. Anyone who has watched all the movies and read many of the between-movie books knows that SW is perhaps one of the most developed storylines of our time.